I've seen a bunch of driver who reeeeeealy want to be in the right lane. They'll move into the right lane even if it's just an on ramp. Even after a "right lane ends" sign. Even in sight of the end of the right lane.

I say pull them over and give them a cavity search because it's clearly a rule issued to drug mules.

BigRightRear:I drive sprint cars on weekends with no mirrors or radios so 'afraid to merge' is bullshiat. It's called common courtesy. Learn some.

Merging two miles ahead of a lane closure, ignoring signs to use both lanes, is not "common courtesy". It isn't courtesy at all, in fact, because it cause traffic.

In fact, I can't think of a single person it helps when you snarl up a lane prematurely, other than the people you call "assholes" passing you who are actually the ones obeying the traffic signs, and people who are pussies who are so afraid of negotiating at a merge point that they think it's a good idea to sit in a snarled lane for two miles with an open lane next to them so they don't have to.

aerojockey:oukewldave: aerojockey: imfallen_angel: DERP... he stated "at the last second."

People who wait till the last second are lesser assholes than people who cause back ups for miles because they merge way way too soon.

What is "merging too soon" mean? You have a sign two miles before the end of the lane that it is ending. At that point, you should be looking for a chance to move out of your lane during those two miles. No one is advocating diving in to the adjacent lane as soon as they are seeing these signs. You continue to drive and find an opening to safely move over.

No. If you see a sign that says "lane ends in two miles" you don't merge then. You drive with awareness that a lane is closing ahead, and wait until there is a sign that say "merge left" or "merge right". Then you merge. If you merge before that (or too far after that) you are an traffic-backup-up asshole.

There's a reason you often seen "use both lanes" signs in situations like this, because assholes start merging and causing backups before that.

People are commenting on the dbags who feel they are too important to sit in the slower lane and drive until they can't anymore on the lane that is closing, then push their way in.

You just said I should start the process of merging two miles ahead of the lane closure. So if I stay in my lane and drive past all you farking lane-snarling sheep until I see a sign that says "lane ends, merge left", and then I merge, I must be too important for you because I obey the construction zone signs including whereas you don't.

Whatever.

Let's be honest here, the real reason people merge two miles ahead of where they should is that they are pussies whose fragile minds can't handle the idea that they might have to do some "negotiating" at the merge point.

People who wait till the last second are lesser assholes than people who cause back ups for miles because they merge way way too soon.

What is "merging too soon" mean? You have a sign two miles before the end of the lane that it is ending. At that point, you should be looking for a chance to move out of your lane during those two miles. No one is advocating diving in to the adjacent lane as soon as they are seeing these signs. You continue to drive and find an opening to safely move over.

No. If you see a sign that says "lane ends in two miles" you don't merge then. You drive with awareness that a lane is closing ahead, and wait until there is a sign that say "merge left" or "merge right". Then you merge. If you merge before that (or too far after that) you are an traffic-backup-up asshole.

There's a reason you often seen "use both lanes" signs in situations like this, because assholes start merging and causing backups before that.

People are commenting on the dbags who feel they are too important to sit in the slower lane and drive until they can't anymore on the lane that is closing, then push their way in.

You just said I should start the process of merging two miles ahead of the lane closure. So if I stay in my lane and drive past all you farking lane-snarling sheep until I see a sign that says "lane ends, merge left", and then I merge, I must be too important for you because I obey the construction zone signs including whereas you don't.

Whatever.

Let's be honest here, the real reason people merge two miles ahead of where they should is that they are pussies whose fragile minds can't handle the idea that they might have to do some "negotiating" at the merge point.

Really? Pussies? I drive sprint cars on weekends with no mirrors or radios so 'afraid to merge' is bullshiat. It's called common courtesy. Learn some.

By merging early you are not being courteous to the people in the lane you just entered. People that were behind you are not going to slow down and merge behind you, so you just delayed that whole line of traffic. That is the opposite of courtesy. When people actually use both lanes to a merge point like they should, it is the ultimate in courteous driving, no one is getting ahead of the game and all are just taking their turn properly. I've seen many instances where both lanes are backed up for miles and people like you think it's a good idea to merge early slowing down one lane and speeding up the other. Just stop it!

lack of warmth : If you are paying attention to what may affect the car ahead of you, then your reaction time should be the same as that driver.

You've hit on the real problem right there - Having the same reaction time as the driver ahead of you doesn't mean you start slowing down at the same time. You assume you both react to the same cue, but what if the driver ahead of you just randomly stomps on his brakes (not as unlikely as it sounds, if he got distracted for half a second and then noticed he had gotten too close to the next car ahead)?

So, at 30MPH, you move at 44 feet per second. For someone paying close attention, they will consciously notice the brake lights after 150-300ms; decide to follow suit over the next 150-300ms; then implement that plan in... yes, another 150-300ms. A young twitch-gamer might beat that by 50%, and a fogie might double it, but in the real world that describes how long it really does take for most people to begin slowing down in response to a change ahead of them: 0.5 to 1 full second.

At a 10ft following distance, at 30MPH, you would need to react in less than 230ms. Even that obnoxious 17YO that can frags you before you can even read the announcement he joined your game, can't realistically manage that. As a consequence, in bumper-to-bumper traffic flowing at 20-40MPH... When someone suddenly stomps on their brakes, an accident does happen, almost unavoidably.

Pocket Ninja:If a driver is able to get away with this manuever, what's happened is that he's identified you as a passive, simpering, frightened fawn of a motorist and is simply exploiting your weakness. No driver worth the space he occupies on the road allows this to happen -- alpha drivers ensure that any such attempt merely ends with the cutter being stuck in the left-hand lane, impotent, weak, defeated.

PsyLord:OhioUGrad: PsyLord: OhioUGrad: If they are trying to say what I think they are saying, there is a big spot in Columbus that I'd encounter every day on the way home from work where a 1 lane exit would get pretty backed up, and people would be zooming past in the left lane, and then cut over at the last minute. Super annoying, I hope they start ticketing these assholes here that do that, but charge them more than $200, make it more like $500. I was cut off to the point I almost hit people several times because if they don't have room (like the article suggests to not give them room) they just start drifting over and if you don't let them over, they'll take the hit then try to blame you for not giving assured clear distance.

You have the right of way. If the other car hits you, that's his/her fault for not staying in his/her lane and/or failure of merging safely. At least that's the way I see it.

/not a lawyer

That's how I see it as well, but 1. I don't want my car hit at all, 2. they'd sit and argue for ever to try and say they had the right to merge etc....I'm sure everyone on Fark has been in this situation probably several times, and I am sure there are several Farkers that CAUSE these situations a few times a week.

The right to merge? Is that even a real thing? Seriously, I would like to know. The way I see it, it should be treated the same way that a car on the oncoming lane wants to turn left and cross your lane as you are going straight. You have the right of way since you are going straight (unless you have a red light or stop sign and they have a green left turn arrow).

Sorry, I meant right of way, watching football, cooking, and posting at the same time.

NightSteel:MarkEC: I've seen plenty of backups that extend back before the previous exit, so maintaining 2 lanes instead of being a lemming and filling the right lane allows the people who are exiting before the lane closure to exit much sooner. They should not have signs saying which lane is closed and just state "One lane closed ahead, use both lanes to merge point."

Ah, I see. So it's not that zipper merging is any faster getting through a choke point, it's that with a shorter tailback, there's less potential for disruption further back.

Makes me wonder what the relevant law is in terms of signage. How far back does the law require signage of merge points? Is it required to say which lane is closed? If signage is in place indicating a zipper merge, and people merge early anyway, is there any remedy?

The story I told earlier in the thread had very large signs that said "USE BOTH LANES TO MERGE POINT" because of the back-up that it caused for 2 or 3 traffic lights leading up to that point. It then had a giant "MERGE HERE - TAKE YOUR TURN" sign at the merge point. The right lane was always backed up for 2 lights and the left lane wasn't even 1 light back. This went on even when they switched to the right lane being the one that was closed. It took an entire week for the lemmings to switch to backing up the left lane instead of the right lane. Yes, if you merge early for no reason except you think it's the nice thing to do, you are a LEMMING!

I looked at the study about flow rates under the two models. Its supporting data is a bit shaky, given that they use only one day of traffic under the uncontrolled model where people presumably merge early, and compare it to 4 different days of traffic under controlled late merging conditions. If that one day had below average traffic, that throws the whole thing off. But, increases in throughput were indeed present--which surprises me. People keep talking about fluid dynamics, but as I understand it, a choke point is a choke point; you can't get 500 cars through a one lane section of road any faster whether they merge early or late.

GBB:PainInTheASP: Now if they would only start ticketing the assholes who ignore miles of "Lane Closed" signs and force their way into the proper lane at the last second.

I'm looking at you, dickhead beamer with the "Baby on Board" sticker. You know who you are. You suck.

"Baby on board"What is the purpose of these signs:1) lets first responders know what to look for in the wreckage2) passively aggressive way of telling other drivers to "take it easy"3) notification to other drivers to explain the erratic driving

4) reminds the parent or guardian to check for the baby before leaving the vehicle unattended

freak7:badhatharry: This is not illegal unless there is a solid line indicating no lane changes allowed. Don't give the police the authority to decide who is and who isn't an asshole.

Passing on the right is illegal.

You might want to check that. In WA state, it is not. I don't have a citation in front of me but I looked it up a few months ago after I accidentally blew past a cop on his right and, shockingly, he didn't do anything.

I was actually using a right hand lane to pass (at a reasonable speed) a handful of cars who were stopped at a light. It turned green just as I was coming up behind, in the perfect position to go around them without losing my speed and without cutting them off at the end of the right lane about a 1/4 mile past the light. The cop was one of the middle cars in front of an SUV so I didn't see him until I was already past him.

pla:lack of warmth : If you are paying attention to what may affect the car ahead of you, then your reaction time should be the same as that driver.

You've hit on the real problem right there - Having the same reaction time as the driver ahead of you doesn't mean you start slowing down at the same time. You assume you both react to the same cue, but what if the driver ahead of you just randomly stomps on his brakes (not as unlikely as it sounds, if he got distracted for half a second and then noticed he had gotten too close to the next car ahead)?

So, at 30MPH, you move at 44 feet per second. For someone paying close attention, they will consciously notice the brake lights after 150-300ms; decide to follow suit over the next 150-300ms; then implement that plan in... yes, another 150-300ms. A young twitch-gamer might beat that by 50%, and a fogie might double it, but in the real world that describes how long it really does take for most people to begin slowing down in response to a change ahead of them: 0.5 to 1 full second.

At a 10ft following distance, at 30MPH, you would need to react in less than 230ms. Even that obnoxious 17YO that can frags you before you can even read the announcement he joined your game, can't realistically manage that. As a consequence, in bumper-to-bumper traffic flowing at 20-40MPH... When someone suddenly stomps on their brakes, an accident does happen, almost unavoidably.

I've witnessed many rear end accidents in stop-and-go traffic on clogged highways. The majority of those have been caused by people who were leaving a seemingly large enough gap in front of them. The farther behind a car you are, the longer it takes you to react. Your depth perception does not work as well at 100 ft as it does at 10ft. That safe gap you leave in front of you can disappear without you having a clue until you slam on your brakes when you are going 40 mph faster than the car in front of you.

NightSteel:I looked at the study about flow rates under the two models. Its supporting data is a bit shaky, given that they use only one day of traffic under the uncontrolled model where people presumably merge early, and compare it to 4 different days of traffic under controlled late merging conditions. If that one day had below average traffic, that throws the whole thing off. But, increases in throughput were indeed present--which surprises me. People keep talking about fluid dynamics, but as I understand it, a choke point is a choke point; you can't get 500 cars through a one lane section of road any faster whether they merge early or late.

Though, thinking about it, in the scenario with nearby stoplights, I could see where it might. That is, with one lane full and one lane empty, you might be able to fit 25 cars in a given section of road, and with a red light behind that section of road, those 25 cars could get through the choke point and leave the road empty. Where, in the same spot, if people filled both lanes and zippered, 50 cars might fit there with a red light behind them, making more efficient use of that space and therefore indeed getting more traffic through. But that only works if there are traffic lights near enough the merge point, which have long enough cycles to allow the section of road ahead to empty out. Or possibly other somewhat specific scenarios.

Shorter tailbacks to prevent issues down the road from the choke point make sense, but beyond that, I don't see a compelling argument one way or the other.

...oh, and none of this really addresses the question, what do you do if there's already a long tailback caused by people who merge early? Because if you skip the line, especially if there's no exits or stoplights that might be disrupted by a longer tailback, people are going to think you're an asshole and feel entirely justified refusing to let you in, and no amount of crying 'fluid dynamics, you lemmings!' is going to change their minds.

Bit'O'Gristle:And just as a side note...everyone ..please ..start looking harder for motorcycles. Get off of your iphone and stop texting dumb shiat like "omg..im stopping at McDonalds now, or ...LOL...that was teh funny!!". People on bikes have little protection from stupid drivers who don't care about anyone but themselves. You're not the only ones out there. Look twice.

/thanks...end of public service announcement.

Sure... as long as the motorcyclist also abides by the traffic laws. Just a few weeks ago while sitting in heavy traffic at a red light, a motorcyclist came flying up through the space between my (straight/right turn) lane and the left-turn lane next to me. The light turned green just when he got alongside my driver's side door. He proceeded to make a right turn directly in front of my vehicle (which was moving, since I was the first car in line) onto the intersecting road.

I do look out for motorcyclists (several family members ride). I try to be courteous. I just hate the dickish motorcyclists who ride with a deathwish.

NightSteel:...oh, and none of this really addresses the question, what do you do if there's already a long tailback caused by people who merge early? Because if you skip the line, especially if there's no exits or stoplights that might be disrupted by a longer tailback, people are going to think you're an asshole and feel entirely justified refusing to let you in, and no amount of crying 'fluid dynamics, you lemmings!' is going to change their minds.

Driver education. Get the local news to hammer home the idea of correct merging when an upcoming project is in the works. Change the signs to not indicate which lane is closed until closer to the merge point. "One lane closed 2 miles ahead" sign followed by "Use both lanes to merge point" sign after it, then "Right lane closed 2500 ft ahead" and "Stay in lane til merge point". There still might be some early mergers, but it will take away the empty off-lane.

Speaking of following distances, here's one that drives me bananas: you're waiting in a left hand turn lane, and you're far enough back that you know you might not make it before the left arrow turns red again. As the arrow turns green, you watch the cars ahead of you taking the turn, and you can't help but notice that many of the cars are allowing a car length or even more between them and the car in front of them. This is at speeds of around twenty to thirty MPH. Another car could have made the turn for every one of those huge gaps caused by inconsiderate jack offs following the car ahead of them at a distance more appropriate for highway speeds.

Even more rage inducing is when you are behind a driver on a city street, approaching a green stoplight. The lane in front of you is clear, but for no apparent reason, the driver in front of you is going five to ten MPH below the speed limit. Just as you get to the light, it turns yellow, and the driver in front of you makes it (though it was a close call whether it was legal) and you have to stop, and wait for the next green. I sometimes wonder if there aren't people out there who get some sort of kick out of deliberately wasting other people's time. Automotive trolls if you will.

Bit'O'Gristle:And just as a side note...everyone ..please ..start looking harder for motorcycles. Get off of your iphone and stop texting dumb shiat like "omg..im stopping at McDonalds now, or ...LOL...that was teh funny!!". People on bikes have little protection from stupid drivers who don't care about anyone but themselves. You're not the only ones out there. Look twice.

/thanks...end of public service announcement.

Have you tried used an automatic centerpunch? One quick click on a side window will definitely wake them up. It can be done at 35 mph, too, so it's not limited to traffic jams. They don't see much movement, either, so it leaves them baffled.

Repo Man:Speaking of following distances, here's one that drives me bananas: you're waiting in a left hand turn lane, and you're far enough back that you know you might not make it before the left arrow turns red again. As the arrow turns green, you watch the cars ahead of you taking the turn, and you can't help but notice that many of the cars are allowing a car length or even more between them and the car in front of them. This is at speeds of around twenty to thirty MPH. Another car could have made the turn for every one of those huge gaps caused by inconsiderate jack offs following the car ahead of them at a distance more appropriate for highway speeds.

Even more rage inducing is when you are behind a driver on a city street, approaching a green stoplight. The lane in front of you is clear, but for no apparent reason, the driver in front of you is going five to ten MPH below the speed limit. Just as you get to the light, it turns yellow, and the driver in front of you makes it (though it was a close call whether it was legal) and you have to stop, and wait for the next green. I sometimes wonder if there aren't people out there who get some sort of kick out of deliberately wasting other people's time. Automotive trolls if you will.

Repo Man:Speaking of following distances, here's one that drives me bananas: you're waiting in a left hand turn lane, and you're far enough back that you know you might not make it before the left arrow turns red again. As the arrow turns green, you watch the cars ahead of you taking the turn, and you can't help but notice that many of the cars are allowing a car length or even more between them and the car in front of them. This is at speeds of around twenty to thirty MPH. Another car could have made the turn for every one of those huge gaps caused by inconsiderate jack offs following the car ahead of them at a distance more appropriate for highway speeds.

Even more rage inducing is when you are behind a driver on a city street, approaching a green stoplight. The lane in front of you is clear, but for no apparent reason, the driver in front of you is going five to ten MPH below the speed limit. Just as you get to the light, it turns yellow, and the driver in front of you makes it (though it was a close call whether it was legal) and you have to stop, and wait for the next green. I sometimes wonder if there aren't people out there who get some sort of kick out of deliberately wasting other people's time. Automotive trolls if you will.

Yes there are. I remember a study done in parking lots where they time how long people take to exit a parking space. With someone waiting for that spot to open, there's a 10 second longer average time than without someone waiting. I'm the opposite, if I get in my car and see someone waiting for my spot, I'll forgo trivial things to get out of the spot quicker.

I've seen a lot of things I agree with here, and I lot I disagree with. But ultimately, there is one problem that tops them all. A lot of people don't really pay attention. Yeah, there are plenty of jerks who are watching everything, but it is amazing how many people seem to be surprised about things that are happening around them (especially for things they should be aware of, like common choke points, or the car that has been ahead of them for miles). Many of these merge areas that cause problems are not something that should be a surprise.

Now, I've seen the arguments. "Oh, don't just jump over idiot". Of course not. No one is arguing that. But you whine that it creates a choke point, which, let's face it, is going to happen later anyway. When you've got two miles to merge, watch for a good time to merge over, and do it earlier. Realistically, that is more than enough time for people to get over without impeding on other drivers, and by the time the merge comes up, everyone may be moving slower, but at least it isn't stop and go as people have to zipper their way in when forced to at the end. It is just frustrating that some people just plain seem oblivious to this, again, not paying attention.

But, I could go on and on. The person who is barely staying in their own lane (the ignorant one). The guy in the passing lane letting everyone get in front of them and braking every time it happens (the passive one). The person who intentionally tries to trap you somewhere (the controlling jerk). Ultimately, if people just figured out how to handle their own vehicles and stop worrying so much about everyone else around them (note, I'm not saying ignore them, be aware, but don't try too hard to be the alpha or passive), a lot of these problems would probably diminish in frequency. Unfortunately, it seems the cliché saying "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" holds for most drivers.

/Me too.//I'm working on it.///Since I prefer to pass on the left, I'm trying harder to get over to the right to let people pass when they are going faster than me.////Mixed results, but I think I'm making progress.

snocone:Just happened to me, here in MN. Prick cut in w/o enough room. I could not stop and was also hit from behind.Prick was insured by ALLSTATE and they as much as told me to go fark, as I must have been "following" too closely.ALLSTATE Insurance are asswipes. Agent apologized, off the record, and said supervisor was forcing this decision.Prick was ticked, did not matter.

ALLFAKE Insurance

If you're insured also, sic your insurance company on them. Become intimate with the concept of subrogation. Make sure they drag the agent into it.

06Wahoo:When you've got two miles to merge, watch for a good time to merge over, and do it earlier.

Seriously, two miles is enough room to pass several cars and still manage a safe exit from a freeway, with room to spare. You have to be an idiot to think you need two miles to merge. 1000 feet (one tenth of the distance) is sufficient to merge.

If you move over before that, all you are accomplishing to back up traffic for no good reason at all.

True, if every driver was a perfect driver. But not all are, and therefore the zipper merge works no better than an early merge. Also why the need for painted lane lines, traffic control lights, speed limit signage, etc.

Self-driving cars that communicate with each other? Now you would be talking safer roads and faster commutes, and generally less-stressed driverspassengers.

rdondelinger:Gecko Gingrich: A proper zipper merge involves no stop and go, and in fact, doesn't even involve slowing down.

True, if every driver was a perfect driver. But not all are, and therefore the zipper merge works no better than an early merge. Also why the need for painted lane lines, traffic control lights, speed limit signage, etc.

Self-driving cars that communicate with each other? Now you would be talking safer roads and faster commutes, and generally less-stressed drivers passengers.

Pocket Ninja:If a driver is able to get away with this manuever, what's happened is that he's identified you as a passive, simpering, frightened fawn of a motorist and is simply exploiting your weakness. No driver worth the space he occupies on the road allows this to happen -- alpha drivers ensure that any such attempt merely ends with the cutter being stuck in the left-hand lane, impotent, weak, defeated.

~~

Except if the driver attempting to cut in is a SOCIOPATH [2% of the population?] or a FARKING MORON [half the population, heh] who is willing to come to a complete stop with their indicator flashing until some chump lets them in. Don't you hate it when you see it unfold a few cars in front of you? For every UNCONSCIONABLY RUDE and selfish driver there is always someone willing to let them in. Drives me nuts.

Part of my frustration is because I'm simply curious to see how long these type of self-centred folk are willing to hold up the traffic behind them before they give up, and finally move with the lane's intended flow and take the next exit. But sure as anything: some weak-assed sucker will let them cut in before 10 seconds elapses.

Asshats texting react slow so that slows down turn lanes. But you're a prick if you cut someone off period.

Can we also issue tickets for people trying to merge on a freeway while on their cell phone?

And ticket people who have to finish their text before actually moving on a green light? Anymore a 10 second green light gets 2 cars through entirely due to slow reaction/texting/blabbing. 4-5 cars at the very least could get through a green light.

And ticket morons how wait to move into your lane just as you are about to pass them.

I_Am_Weasel:What bugs me is people who aren't paying attention to their driving, they're doing other things like talking on their phone, playing with the radio or DOING NEWS REPORTS.

I came here to ask what the fine is for doing a goddamn live news report while driving a farking car at goddamn night. hopefully we see a follow up tag with this asswipe getting a distracted driving ticket.

Bit'O'Gristle:"is it against the law? can you get a ticket?" Well, first of all, you're speeding to get ahead of traffic, which IS against the law, and yes, you are allowed to speed up to pass, but you are passing while not using your signal, cutting people off, and weaving in and out of traffic which creates a dangerous environment for other motorists. Besides the legality of it, it is a dick move, and when you do that, you're an asshole. Just because you're in a hurry, isn't justification to put everyone else's lives at risk. Leave earlier.

I am a courier (so leaving earlier isn't an option) and drive in this sh*t for 8+ hours a day! I call some of these people 'line jumpers', which I have to do occasionally but I never hold up the line of traffic to accomplish this! The people who come to a complete stop to merge into another lane piss me off! But so do the people who will not let them in!I wish the DMV in all states would require all potential drivers to show they know how to merge and let others merge before they receive a license!

I looked at the study about flow rates under the two models. Its supporting data is a bit shaky, given that they use only one day of traffic under the uncontrolled model where people presumably merge early, and compare it to 4 different days of traffic under controlled late merging conditions. If that one day had below average traffic, that throws the whole thing off. But, increases in throughput were indeed present--which surprises me. People keep talking about fluid dynamics, but as I understand it, a choke point is a choke point; you can't get 500 cars through a one lane section of road any faster whether they merge early or late.

But at the "choke point" at people traveling on average 25 mph or 35 mph. If you increase the average speed through the choke point you greatly decrease congestion. I'd be willing to bet with a controlled experiment with professional drivers the results would be similar for early merging and zipper merging. In reality your simply moving the choke point backwards with early merging, which may be a good thing or a really bad thing.

NewportBarGuy:pla: But simply blocking them from ever getting back into traffic doesn't solve the problem.

It does for me. I keep a 12" interval and allow no one in unless it's seriously backed up, merged traffic. Just some impatient asshole trying to force his way in? Not happening.

If people would simply merge further back, you'd avoid most of the traffic jam anyway.

Truckers who swing into the other lane, or idiots who slam on their brakes for basically no reason other than they weren't paying attention until they saw traffic slow down, end up causing ripple effects that bring the flow of traffic to a dead halt no matter where people merge. Despite the actual capacity of a lane being fairly high, some people won't drive more than 10 MPH if there's a crew nearby, even on the other side of concrete dividers. Goes double for truckers desperate to save on diesel - I've seen one leave a mile-long gap in front by the time I got past construction and around him.

I think the real assholes are the people who biatch and moan about something as trivial as this. That one car even had a turn signal. If a car has their turn signal on for three blinks to give ample notice they want in your lane, and you do what you can to not let them in said lane; you are the real asshole. Not them. The other people cutting in front without having ample space or giving a turn signal? Screw those bastards. The rest of them didn't do anything wrong. People should take a deep breath, relax, and realize that if something like this video irritates them then they have some really severe issues in their lives to deal with, because such a thing isn't normal or healthy.

aerojockey:safetycap: People who wait till the last second are lesser assholes than people who cause back ups for miles because they merge way way too soon and leave big-arsed gaps in front of them because they space out, distract themselves and/or get scared.

That too. In California there's another reason for this: people don't want to strain their precious BMW and Audi engines by accelerating it too fast, so cultrally there's a tendency not to ever "gun it". Ergo, lots of gaps. Ergo, lots of people cutting in front of you.

It's more annoying at traffic lights than on the freeway, though. At traffic lights people will take their foot off the brake and idle until the car hits 5 or 10 mph before accelerating. Annoying as fark if you're the second car in line. Other that, traffic lights are much better in California than any other state I've been in.

What's bizarre is that this is a relatively recent phenomenon, though. Los Angeles had insanely short on-ramps from the 40's to roughly the late 70's to early 90's, when they went on a reconstruction binge. You had to stomp the gas to get up to speed, and still do in some places. I don't know if it's gas prices or hypermiling or people desperate to keep the little "green" indicator going on their Leaf or Prius, but it's looney tunes that we have several times the power of an old hot rod in every low-end family sedan now (at ten or more times the gas mileage) but people still drive as if they're behind the wheel of a Volvo 240.

Don't come to Fresno if you get frustrated over traffic lights, though. Unsensored lights timed for rush hour traffic (including minute-long protected lefts) at 3 am will leave you pondering the chances of a cop spotting you, since no one else is around to notice.